ABSTRACT Reality Monitoring (RM) criteria has been proposed as a forensic tool in
order to discern between perceived and imagined memories. However, no systematic evidence
has been provided on its validity for use in testimony evaluation. Thus, a meta-analytic
review was designed to study its validity in forensic setting. A total of 40 primary
studies were found, yielding 251 effect sizes. Random-effects meta-analyses correcting
the effect size for sampling error and criterion unreliability were performed. The
results showed that the total RM score discriminated, d = 0.542 (δ = 0.562), between
imagined and perceived memories of events. In relation to individual criteria, the
results showed support for the model's predictions (more external attributes in perceived
memories) for clarity, d = 0.361 (δ = 0.399), sensory information, d = 0.359 (δ =
0.397), spatial information, d = 0.250 (δ = 0.277), time information, d = 0.509 (δ
= 0.563), reconstructability of the story, d = 0.441 (δ = 0.488), and realism, d =
0.420 (δ = 0.464), but not for affective information, d = 0.024 [-0.081, 0.129]. Nevertheless,
except for temporal information, the results are not generalized (negative effects
may be found). For cognitive operations, the results corroborated, although the magnitude
of the effect was lower than small, the hypothesis (more cognitive operations in imagined
memories), d = -0.107 [-0.178, -0.036] (δ = -0.119). The moderating effects of age
(more cognitive operations on imagined memories in adults, and on perceived memories
in underage), evocation type (external attributes discern between imagined and perceived
memories, in both self-experienced and non-experimented accounts), and criteria score
(the results varied by score) moderators were studied. As conclusions, forensic implications
for the validity of the RM technique in court proceedings are discussed.